On Jan 18, 2008, at 10:19 AM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2008, at 10:13 AM, Tanya Lattner wrote:
>> Should the test/CodeGen/X86/aligned-comm.ll be un-XFAILED? Its now
>> XPASSing.
>>
>> -Tanya
>
> I guess so; given the current state of llvm it is supposed to pass.
> Longterm what should ha
On Jan 18, 2008, at 10:13 AM, Tanya Lattner wrote:
> Should the test/CodeGen/X86/aligned-comm.ll be un-XFAILED? Its now
> XPASSing.
>
> -Tanya
I guess so; given the current state of llvm it is supposed to pass.
Longterm what should happen is that tentative definitions ("common")
get represe
Should the test/CodeGen/X86/aligned-comm.ll be un-XFAILED? Its now
XPASSing.
-Tanya
On Jan 17, 2008, at 3:04 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> Author: johannes
> Date: Thu Jan 17 17:04:07 2008
> New Revision: 46144
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46144&view=rev
> Log:
> Revert the
Please revert the ARM changes as well. I am assuming the bug is there
as well. :-)
Evan
On Jan 17, 2008, at 3:04 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> Author: johannes
> Date: Thu Jan 17 17:04:07 2008
> New Revision: 46144
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46144&view=rev
> Log:
> Revert
Author: johannes
Date: Thu Jan 17 17:04:07 2008
New Revision: 46144
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46144&view=rev
Log:
Revert the part of 45848 that treated weak globals
as weak globals rather than commons. While not wrong,
this change tickled a latent bug in Darwin's strip,
so reve
